NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER: 2022/DHC/005682

W.P. (C) 9834/2022 Page 1 of 20

$~J

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) 9834/2022

M/S. VALLABH TEXTILES

......Petitioner

Through:

Mr Vivek Sarin with Mr Dibya Prashant

Singh, Advocates.

SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER AND ORS.......Respondents

Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, Sr. St. Counsel for

respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Ms. Anushree Narain, Adv. for respondent

No.3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

[Physical Court hearing/ Hybrid hearing (as per request)]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface:…………………………………………………………………..…02

Background:…………………………………………………………..……03

Submissions of the counsels:……………………………………….…..….06

Reasons and Analysis:…………………………..…………………………10

Conclusion:………………………………………………………………...19

Digitally Signed By:TARUN

RANA

Signing Date:20.12.2022

19:15:33

Signature Not Verified

NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER: 2022/DHC/005682

W.P. (C) 9834/2022 Page 2 of 20

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.

Preface:

1. The sole question which arises for our consideration is: whether the

cumulative sum of Rs.1,80,10,000/- deposited on behalf of the petitioner-

concern, during search proceedings carried out between 16.02.2022 and

17.02.2022, was a voluntary act or not.

2. The petitioner claims, that the aforementioned amount was deposited

in four (4) tranches, between 01:28 A.M. and 07:03 A.M. on 17.02.2022.

3. It is the petitioner’s case, that the search commenced at about 03:30

PM on 16.02.2022 and ended at 09:30 AM on 17.02.2022.

4. Respondents no. 1 and 2 [“official respondents”]/revenue, however,

contend to the contrary.

4.1

It is the official respondents/revenue’s broad stand, that the

aforementioned amount was deposited against challan(s) submitted in the

prescribed form i.e., Form GST DRC-03, each of which is dated 17.02.2022.

5. The official respondents/revenue, thus, take the position, that the

allegation of coercion is an afterthought, which was raised only on

25.05.2022 after summons had already been served on the petitioner-

concern.

6. The principal controversy in the matter was noticed, when the matter

was listed before the Court for the first time on 05.07.2022. On that date,

notice was issued in the petition. The official respondents/revenue were

Digitally Signed By:TARUN

RANA

Signing Date:20.12.2022

19:15:33

Signature Not Verified

NEUTRAL CITATION NUMBER: 2022/DHC/005682

W.P. (C) 9834/2022 Page 3 of 20

represented by Mr Satish Kumar, senior standing counsel who appeared on

behalf of respondents no. 1 and 2, and Ms Anushree Narain, who appeared

on behalf of respondent no.3.

7. It is pertinent to note, at this juncture, that on the returnable date i.e.,

26.08.2022, Mr Vivek Sarin, who appears on behalf of the petitioner-

concern confined the relief sought in the writ petition to prayer clause (a),

which concerns, in effect, the relief for return of Rs.1,80,10,000/- along with

statutory interest, deposited on behalf of petitioner-concern.

7.1

Consequently, it was indicated to us, that other reliefs will not be

pressed in the instant writ action.

Background:

8. Before we proceed further, it would be relevant to etch out the broad

backdrop in which the present writ petition has been preferred.

9. The petitioner-concern, which is in the business of trading in Ready-

Made Garments (RMG) is also engaged in selling these very goods on

behalf of third parties, albeit in the domestic market, on a commission basis.

10. It is alleged by the official respondents/revenue, that the petitioner-

concern, inter alia sold goods, in cash, on behalf of two